The bill on "religious neutrality" just introduced by the Liberal government of Philippe Couillard will raise much indignation among the disciples of "laïcité radicale" (radical secularism) who applauded, two years ago, the Parti Québécois government's intention of forbiding religious symbols for public-sector employees. Muslim women who wear some kind of veil over their hair would have been the first victims of this sectarian policy – which, fortunately, disappeared from the scene after then-premier Pauline Marois called an election – and lost.
Still, the PQ bill on "Quebec values" has left deep marks on the society. The acrimonious debate lasted for months. It deeply hurt the already precarious relations between old-stock francophones and Muslim immigrants. It pitted those who favour the French model of "laïcité intégrale" (an authoritarian system that obviously doesn't work) against the tenets of the liberal model that actually prevails in most Western democracies.
There's no doubt the same kind of debate will resurface this time around, yet it should be somewhat muted by the summer heat and vacations – and also because the public at large has had enough of it.
The Couillard government opted for a clear and simple formula: the state should be religiously "neutral" (rather than secular) and for "reasons of security and communication," public-sector employees will be required to work with their face uncovered, which in effect would bring a ban on niqabs and burkas.
This limitation is perfectly acceptable although it deals with a non-problem (how many burkas do you see at government desks?). What is absolutely unacceptable is that the same measure would apply to the clientele. This means, for example, that a woman wearing a face-covering niqab could be refused treatment in a hospital. One hopes that the government will delete this provision from the law before it is stricken by the courts. And there's another glitch: the so-called "neutral" state will still let the Duplessis-era crucifix overlook the debates in the National Assembly, because it is supposedly a "patrimonial object," which, of course, it isn't.
Actually, this bill has really no purpose other than electoral. It comes from a promise the Liberals made when they were in opposition, under pressure from some MNAs who wanted a "liberal," softer version of the PQ's "bill on values". (This bill was quite popular in certain segments of the francophone population, especially outside the Montreal area – where the votes are).
Mr. Couillard, who's visibly embarrassed by the whole question, steadfastly refused to opt for a compromize solution that would apply the ban on religious symbols to the representatives of the power of the state (namely judges, police and prison wardens). The PQ's new leader, Pierre Karl Péladeau, as well as the other opposition party, the Coalition Avenir Québec, are in favour of this approach, but they also call for a ban of religious symbols in the education sector. But there's little chance that the government will back down since it is now in a position of strength.
It just won two by-elections, including one in a riding previously held by the CAQ that the PQ should have been poised to win. And a recent Léger Marketing poll shows that despite some harsh budget cuts, the Couillard government is quite popular. The rate of statisfaction went up by seven points in a month, and the Liberals have regained first place, ahead of the PQ by four points – this, precisely at the time when the PQ, with its brand-new and high-profile leader, should be enjoying some sort of honeymoon with the electorate.
Lysiane Gagnon